CHAPTER XIX - Commercial Street

This street (fig. 65) was built in two sections. The southern part, from Whitechapel High Street to Spitalfields church,
was built in 1843–5 by the Commissioners of
Woods and Forests, under Acts of August 1839
and August 1840. (fn. 1) The northern section, from
the church to Shoreditch High Street, was laid
out between 1849 and 1857 by the Commissioners
of Woods and, after 1851, by the Commissioners
of Works, under an Act of July 1846 and others of
August 1850 and August 1853. (fn. 2) The frontages
were not quickly built upon and some sites remained undeveloped in 1870.

These Acts also provided for the construction
of New Oxford Street, Cranbourn Street and
Endell Street. These streets, together with Commercial Street, represented modified parts of the
scheme of James Pennethorne for ’Metropolitan
Improvements’, while Commercial Street in particular formed a link in his scheme for a line of
communication from the docks to the northern
and western parts of London.

The first governmental consideration of a new
street in Spitalfields and Whitechapel was made by
a Select Committee on Metropolitan Improvements in August 1836. This Committee recommended the construction of a street ’from Finsbury
Square to Whitechapel Church and the Commercial Road’, (fn. 3) running in a straight line from the
Bishopsgate Street end of Middlesex Street to
near the southern end of Osborn Street. (fn. 4) This
was approximately the line that the City favoured,
to relieve the congestion in Aldgate and Leaden
hall Street. The cost was estimated at £300,000. (fn. 4)
An alternative scheme put to the Committee by
the chairman of the Tower Hamlets Commissioners of Sewers was, however, closer to the line
finally chosen. This was for a street from the
London Docks through Leman Street to Spitalfields church and thence to the western end of
Church Street, Bethnal Green. This more
northerly projection of the street was urged because of the proposed construction of the Eastern
Counties railway terminus on the site of Webb's
Square, Shoreditch, a factor which ultimately
determined the line of the northern end of the
street. (fn. 5)

In August 1838 another Select Committee
again suggested a line from Whitechapel to
Bishopsgate Street, but carried to the western end
of Union (Brushfield) Street, where Sun Street
would continue the line to Finsbury Square. (fn. n1)
They suggested also the southern continuation of
the line to the London Docks. (fn. 6) They had, however, heard representatives of Spitalfields and
Bethnal Green parishes, whose views resembled
those of the Tower Hamlets Commissioners of
Sewers, and favoured a line from the southern end
of Rose Lane to the northern end of Wheler
Street. Thence it might run into Shoreditch
High Street or behind Shoreditch church. (fn. 7) The
more northerly direction of the line had the
advantages of communicating with Spitalfields
Market (fn. 8) and the new railway terminus, and of
making some use of the lines of existing streets. It
also performed more extensively than the line first
suggested a function which was agreed to be of the
greatest importance, that of opening up the congested warren of seventeenth-century streets and
eighteenth- and nineteenth-century courts on the
line of the street. Quite apart from its merits as a
communication route a new street was advocated
to facilitate the draining and policing of the area.
It would achieve ’the destruction of a neighbourhood inhabited by persons addicted to vices and
immorality of the worst description’, (fn. 9) and permit
the better surveillance of ’a low population’, which
was hitherto ’without any respectable persons to
keep them at all in check and under control’. (fn. 4) The
Committee thought it an area ’presenting serious
obstacles to the efficient action even of the best
constituted police’, (fn. 6) while the rector of Spitalfields
cordially agreed that the route through his parish
was ’inhabited by an exceedingly immoral population’ and desired that a new street should ’open it
to public observation’. (fn. 7) The rector was equally
convinced that a new street would assist the
drainage of a fever-ridden district that was
mainly dependent on an open ditch across Mile
End New Town. (fn. 10) The improvement of sanita-
tion was later acknowledged to be ’one of the
principal objects for the formation of the new
street’. (fn. 11)

Figure 65:

Commercial Street, lay-out plan. Previous
lay-out based on a plan in the Public Record Office

In March 1839 another Select Committee
recommended that New Oxford Street, Cranbourn Street, Endell Street and a ’spacious
thoroughfare’ from London Docks to Spital fields
should be built by the Commissioners of Woods
and Forests. The Committee thought that
£200,000 ’employed in aid of the capital which
individual or associated enterprise may reasonably
be expected to bring to the execution of such
works’ would be sufficient. (fn. 12)

Following the recommendations of the Select
Committee James Pennethorne prepared plans for
the new streets on behalf of the Commissioners of
Woods, (fn. 13) in consultation with Thomas Chawner,
the Commissioners’ architect and surveyor. (fn. 14)
These plans were submitted to the Treasury in
May 1839 (fn. 14) for the preparation of the necessary
Bill, which received the royal assent in August. (fn. 15)
This Act empowered the Commissioners to raise
£200,000 out of certain funds derived from the
duties on coal and wine, including the ’Orphans
Fund’ and the ’London Bridge Approaches
Fund’, in order to construct the four streets. The
Commissioners were also empowered to make
surveys but not as yet to undertake actual construction.

It was, however, discovered by the Commissioners that the cost would be £638,000, and a
further Committee was appointed which heard
evidence in the spring of 1840. A renewed suggestion for a street from Whitechapel to Bishopsgate Street was made by Messrs. J. W. Higgins
and R. L. Jones, (fn. 16) the latter being described in a
later account as ’a person of great influence in the
City, and one who was alive to the chance of
diverting money to his quarter of the metropolis’. (fn. 17)
In reply Pennethorne and Chawner stressed the
greater value for London's communications of
their more northerly direction of the line. The
other line would bring traffic into the City
whereas their plan was intended ’to form a great
communication from the port of London to all the
railways that come to the north of London, and
also to the north and north-western parts of London, without going into the city’. (fn. 18) Pennethorne's ultimate object at this time was to take
the street as far north as Shoreditch, for which
plans had already been prepared, and then to link
it with the City Road. (fn. 19) Pennethorne and Chaw- ner had, however, reduced the estimated net
outlay on the Whitechapel-Spitalfields street from
some £141,000 to some £91,000, partly by terminating it at Spitalfields church instead of at the
market, and by reducing its proposed width south
of the church to fifty feet. (fn. 20) The latter economy
was abandoned in execution but otherwise the
plan accompanying the Committee's report in
June 1840 was that carried out. The Committee
recommended other economies, including the
abandonment of the Cranbourn Street scheme, to
reduce the estimated total outlay to £279,000. (fn. 21)

The Act of August 1840 authorized the Commissioners of Woods to proceed with the work,
and to raise a further £100,000 from the funds and
purchase the necessary property. (fn. 22)

The curtailment of the ’improvements’ was
criticized in The Westminster Review of July-October 1841, which prophesied that the economies would ’one day be universally lamented’. It
regretted the failure to attempt the fulfilment of
Pennethorne's original idea of a road ringing the
City on the line of Hart Street, Theobalds Road
and Old Street, to join the road from the docks at
Shoreditch. The termination of the street at
Spitalfields church was particularly ridiculed ’as if
the only object of the line was to enable the sailors
of our merchantmen to attend divine service on
Sunday’. (fn. 23)

The financing of the Commissioners’ work was
dependent on the gradual accumulation of funds,
and want of ready money postponed the clearing
of the line until early in 1843, (fn. 24) most of the
property being purchased in that and the preceding
year. (fn. 25)

In March 1843 the Government's intention
was to continue the street past the Shoreditch
railway terminus to the junction of Old Street and
the City Road. (fn. 26)

The work of clearing so closely built an area
was not always easy: men worked at night to
empty and fill in the dangerous ’privy-pits’ in the
congested courts on the line of the street. (fn. 27) The
old properties were sold privately for demolition,
the Commissioners’ architects finding that ’by
selling by Private Tender … in low neighbourhoods many difficulties are avoided and a better
price realized’ than by public auctions. (fn. 28) In
August 1844 the tender of J. and C. I'Anson of
Fitzroy Square to construct the vaults along the
street for £3,098 was accepted. (fn. 29) In November
the gas-pipes were laid. (fn. 30) By December the line
was completely marked out, (fn. 31) and in January of
the following year tenders were invited for paving
the street. (fn. 32) The name Commercial Street was
decided on by September 1845 after the name
Spital Street had been abandoned because it
duplicated an existing local street-name. (fn. 33) In
October 1845 the Commissioners issued notices
for the erection of houses along the line of the
street, which was divided into thirty-two lots to be
leased for eighty years from Christmas 1845. (fn. 34)
Many of the plots were not disposed of at this sale.
In June 1849 Whitechapel parish complained
that some sites were still unbuilt and that too high
prices were being asked by the Commissioners,
who replied that these would be obtainable when
the extension to Shoreditch was completed. (fn. 35) As
late as 1861, however, building sites constituting
most of both sides of the street south of Fashion
Street were still being sold by auction. (fn. 36)

The completion of the line northward from
Christ Church to Old Street was strongly urged
on the Commissioners in June 1844 by a memorial
from the inhabitants of the locality. (fn. 37) Pennethorne informed the Commissioners that the extension of the street to the terminus of the Eastern
Counties railway at Shoreditch would cost some
£40,000 and its continuance thence to the junction of Old Street and the City Road a further
£112,000. The insanitary and disreputable nature
of the property between the church and station
was again stressed. (fn. 38) In April 1845 the Commissioners recommended the extension of the
street as far as the Shoreditch terminus. In May
1846 they were seeking to adjust the plans of the
Eastern Counties Railway Company for the proposed extension of their terminus to fit the plans
for the new street. (fn. 39)

An Act of July 1846 (fn. 40) authorized the Commissioners to make the extension to Shoreditch
and to raise £120,000 out of ’The Metropolis
Improvement Fund’. For some two years, however, little or nothing was done. In May 1848
Viscount Morpeth told the Commons that ’the
proceedings in regard to these metropolitan improvements must be reported as almost wholly
stationary, not in consequence of any want of confidence in the Commission, but solely owing to the
conclusive reason of want of money. The money
required to carry the recommendations into effect
must be raised in the first instance by mortgage of
the land revenues; and all that could be fairly
relied upon from this source had been anticipated for the four main lines from the Docks to
Spitalfield, Coventry Street [i.e. Cranbourn
Street], Oxford Street East and Endell Street.’ (fn. 41)
According to The Builder, ’Some detail was then
entered into respecting … the proposed improvements between Spitalfields Church and Shoreditch, but unfortunately the noise of the House,
not unusual when art or improvement are talked
of, drowned the statement’, (fn. 42) which is not reported in Hansard. Between December of that
year and the end of 1851 most of the property on
the line of the extension was purchased. (fn. 43) In
August 1850 a further Act (fn. 44) prolonged the Commissioners’ powers of purchase and authorized
them to raise a further £60,000, although it was
not anticipated that the final cost would be more
than £120,000. In July 1851 Messrs. J. and C.
I'Anson's tender for the construction of the vaults
as far north as the line of Fleur-de-lis Street was
accepted (fn. 45) and the first 1,000 feet of the extension
was ready for the laying of the sewers. (fn. 46) The
Spitalfields and Shoreditch New Street Act of
August 1853 (fn. 47) granted the Commissioners of
Works, in succession to the Commissioners of
Woods, a further extension of time for the purchase of property and the line of street in relation
to the Eastern Counties railway terminus was
authorized. By January 1856 the street was complete and paved as far as Fleur-de-lis Street, (fn. 48) and
was open to Shoreditch High Street by January
1858. (fn. 49)

The expense of the extension had been the subject of inquiries addressed in 1857 by the Office
of Works to Pennethorne, who had some difficulty
in framing an adequate reply. It appears from his
statement of May 1857 that in 1847 the Eastern
Counties Railway Company had been expected to
make the northern extremity of the street, and its
eventual construction by the Commissioners had
increased the estimate of some £160,000 made
in 1847 to some £183,000 estimated in 1850.
Pennethorne thought that the total sum which
would have been needed by the time the new
street was completed would be about £231,000.
Against this sum had to be set the receipts from
ground and building rents. (fn. 50) In July 1857
Pennethorne pointed out that the cost of the
street had been increased by the small instalments
in which the funds were made available. Money
had been raised by mortgaging property already
purchased, including ground mortgaged to the
Commissioners of Greenwich Hospital to secure
£20,000, (fn. 51) and he thought this means would
provide the funds necessary to complete the
street. (fn. 52) It was perhaps with conscious reference
to the disagreements between Pennethorne and
the Commissioners over costs that William (later
Sir William) Tite praised Pennethorne's ’proper
application of the large sums necessary for the purchase of property for great improvements’, when
presenting the Sir William Chambers gold medal
of the Royal Institute of British Architects to him
at this time. In the management of the improvements ’the money had been applied usefully,
economically, gracefully, and elegantly’. (fn. 53)

The first public auction of land in the new
extension took place in August 1858; a site
adjoining the Eastern Counties terminus was then
described as ’extremely well adapted for the erection of a first-class hotel, manufacturing premises,
capital shops or dwelling houses’. (fn. 54) The following
year the rector of Christ Church, wishing to
reduce the price asked for a site for St. Stephen's
Church, claimed that the result of the auction
’went to prove that the value of the ground had
been over estimated’. (fn. 55) It was 1869 before all the
sites were sold. (fn. 56)

The Builder(fn. 57) announced the commencement
of building operations in the new street in January
1862. (fn. n2) Architects in the new extension included
Mr. H. H. Collins (also the architect of the Jewish
and East London Model Lodgings), Mr. Reddall
and Mr. N. S. Joseph. (fn. 59) Most of the buildings in
this part of the street were built in the 1860's but
the police station site was not occupied until
1874–5.

The line of which Commercial Street was intended to form part was further developed by the
construction in 1872–6 of Great Eastern Street,
joining Commercial Street to Old Street, by the
Metropolitan Board of Works. (fn. 60)

Associated with the completion of the new
street was the extension of Quaker Street westward to join it north of St. Stephen's Church.
The Act of July 1846 for the enlargement of
the Shoreditch railway terminus (fn. 61) required the
Eastern Counties Railway Company to make the
street. It was not, however, constructed until
1858–9, (fn. 62) the paving and macadamizing being
completed for the Commissioners by George G.
Rutty of Elder Street in 1861–2. (fn. 63)

The degree of control over the architectural
character of the buildings on the street was
apparently slight, although the granting of leases
was subject to the Commissioners’ approval of the
proposed plans and elevations. The Commissioners’ records suggest that such control as was
exercised was directed to securing a use of sites
that would enhance the market value of the
street-frontage rather than to any close architectural control of the elevations. In 1846 the
(Metropolitan) Association for Improving the
Dwellings of the Industrious Classes sought to
obtain the lease of a site in the southern part of the
new street and submitted a plan and elevation for
buildings forming a paved court open to the street.
The Commissioners refused to grant a lease, fearing that the court would ’be almost constantly filled
with Loiterers and Women’. They were further
’of the opinion that the allowing a building of the
proposed description in any part of the New Street
would be prejudicial to the letting of the remainder of the building ground there’. (fn. 64). In 1849 the
Commissioners were concerned at the ’very
unsightly appearance’ of a public house on the
northern corner of Fashion Street and Commercial Street, which was ’likely to be detrimental
to the property acquired by us’, and sold to the
owner a strip of land bordering the street on condition that he pulled down the public house and
adjoining house and on their site built five houses
according to designs approved by the Commissioners, which was done (see fig. 66). (fn. 65) It was perhaps this desire to preserve the dignity of the street
that caused the Commissioners to make a condition in their lease of the Jews’ Infant School site
that no entrance for the children should be made
on the Commercial Street front. (fn. 66) The request by
the rector of Christ Church in 1858 for a site for a
new church, built as St. Stephen's, was supported
by Pennethorne who considered that ’the erection
of a Church on the site proposed would be a great
benefit to, and increase the respectability of, the
whole of this District which is now in a very low
condition’. Pennethorne made suggestions for the
siting and orientation of the church in the early
stages of the project. (fn. 67)

The difficulty of disposing of sites in such a ’low
neighbourhood’ militated against the enforcement
of a high standard of design. When a site between
Commercial Street and Shepherd Street (now
Toynbee Street), which had been offered unavailingly in 1845, was finally granted on a cheap
building lease in 1858 Pennethorne thought it
more advisable to accept the low rent to ’secure
the covering of the ground than to allow it to
remain vacant’, and recommended the approval of
the designs for houses and shops although ’the
character of the houses … as shewn by the drawings is not altogether so good as I could have
desired’. (fn. 68)

The supposed value of the street as a means of
enforcing law and order was asserted in the
opening of Keate Court (now the western end of
Thrawl Street) into the new street in 1859. The
Whitechapel District Board of Works informed
the Office of Works that this court was ’about the
worst spot in a notoriously bad neighbourhood and
it is positively unsafe for respectable persons to
visit it’. This they attributed to the lack of outlet
into the new street. Pennethorne told the Commissioners that he understood the police thought
the locality safer with the court shut than open.
In fact, however, the police were willing for the
court to be connected with the street and a footpath to be kept open all night between Brick
Lane and Commercial Street. This was therefore done. (fn. 69) It remained, however, a notoriously
lawless part of Spitalfields.

Figure 66:

Commercial Street, elevations of typical buildings

Commercial Street has always presented a
strange assortment of styles, materials and scales,
in strong contrast to the uniformity originally
prevailing in the Italianate stucco of the contemporaneous new streets in the West End (fig. 66).
Commercial Street has little enough of stucco but
plenty of brick, yellow, red, and ’white’, often
with polychrome dressings, and the most favoured
style was a ’Warehouse Gothic’ of a particularly
brutal kind, with window arches of cut brick and
stone displaying originality of a most perverse
order. Perhaps the most startling example of this
style is No. 43, at the south end of the street, but
the most generous display of curious window
arches is to be seen at Nos. 81–85 (odd) just south
of the market.

In the north part of the street, beyond Christ
Church and the market, much of the original east
side has gone. On the west side, however, are
three striking examples of Victorian eclecticism.
The Peabody Buildings (Plate 77a), after four
storeys of sober dark red brick, break into a
flamboyant skyline with curvilinear gables spaced
between closely ranked windows. The police
station (Plate 49a), a sombre palazzo, has an
arcaded ground storey of stone and three welldefined storeys of red brick with widely spaced
windows. Lastly, there is No. 157, a warehouse
with a front of curiously Vanbrughian flavour, its
windows grouped into interesting patterns and its
parapet terminated by two great urns.

St. Stephen's Church and Parsonage,
Commercial Street

Church demolished

St. Stephen's Church (Plate 43c, fig. 67) was
built through the efforts of the Rev. John
Patteson, rector of Christ Church, and a group
of parishioners including Robert Hanbury and
Thomas Fowell Buxton, who thought that the
population of Christ Church parish had become
too great to be served by a single church. (fn. 70) Its
district was formed by an Order in Council in
1858, out of the north-western portion of Christ
Church parish. (fn. 71) A freehold site on the east
side of Commercial Street was conveyed to the
Ecclesiastical Commissioners by the Commissioners of Works in 1860 (fn. 72) for £2,320. The
architect of the church and parsonage was Ewan
Christian, (fn. 74) whose plans were approved by the
Ecclesiastical Commissioners on 16 August 1860. (fn. 73)
The builders were Messrs. Brown and Robinson
of Worship Street, Bishopsgate. (fn. 74) The church
was consecrated by the Bishop of London on 6
December 1861. (fn. 74)

Figure 67:

St. Stephen's Church, Commercial Street, 1861,
plan. Based on the Ordnance Survey 1873–5

In 1863 the district was enlarged by the inclusion of small portions of the parishes of St.
Leonard, Shoreditch, and St. Philip, Bethnal
Green. (fn. 75) The church was closed and its parish
re-united to that of Christ Church on 27 February
1930. (fn. 73) The church was demolished, but the
parsonage still stands, and is now used for commercial purposes.

The church was described in 1863 by James
Thorne, writing in The British Almanac, (fn. 76) as
follows: ’The church is of yellow brick, with red
and black bricks sparingly introduced. Its distinctive feature is the apse … which, instead of
serving as the chancel, as is usual, is placed at the
west end of the nave— a fashion borrowed, with
some other features, from Germany. The windows, as will be noticed, are small, and in two
ranges, the lowest being placed at a considerable
height from the ground. To our thinking, nothing
can well surpass the ugliness of the exterior, but it
has been well studied and laboriously attained.
Beside it is a parsonage, quite as quaint as the
church, and infinitely meaner. Both church and
parsonage are placed at an awkward angle to each
other and to the street, but this was probably done with the object of turning the ground to as much
account as possible. The interior of the church is
almost as peculiar as the outside. In form it is an
exact square (of 61 feet), without the apse. The
eastern wall is pierced with three small star-lights
in the gable. The nave is equal in width to the
two aisles (28 feet), but the north aisle is three and
a half feet wider than the south. The walls are
plastered, but the piers and arches are faced with
red and white bricks. Altogether, there is no
doubt that novelty of effect is obtained; the
beautiful or the pleasing must be sought elsewhere.
As regards convenience, something may be said
in its favour. There are only two pillars on each
side, and, practically, the view is almost unobstructed. The church is said to be also well adapted for
hearing, but to us there seemed an unpleasant
reverberation, during both the reading of the
service and the sermon. This may have arisen,
however, from sitting near the apse, during an
afternoon service; it would perhaps be less noticeable if the church were full.’ To this description
it is necessary to add that the church was entered
through porches, one on each side of the western
apse, that on the south side forming the base of the
tower, which had a saddle-back roof.

No. 43A Commercial Street

Formerly Jews' Infant School

In 1841 a school for 200 Jewish children was
opened in Houndsditch, (fn. 77) the first honorary
president being Francis Henry Goldsmid. In
December 1858 Goldsmid and Nathaniel Monte-fiore took a building lease for eighty years of a site
for a new school in Commercial Street from the
Commissioners of Works, (fn. 77) the carcass of the
building having already been erected (fn. 66) (Plate 46c).
The architects were Messrs. Tillot and Chamberlain. The lowest tender, for £3,719, was submitted by George Myers, of Guildford Street and
Ordnance Wharf, Belvedere Road, Lambeth. (fn. 78).
The final cost of the building was about £5,000. (fn. 79)

In 1861 there were 560 pupils registered in the
school, with a regular attendance of 348, (fn. 79) most
of the children making a small payment towards
their tuition. During the winter, dinners were
provided twice weekly. (fn. 80) The school was highly
praised by The Builder, both for its building and
for the standard of its work. (fn. 79)

The freehold of the school site was purchased
in 1865 from the Commissioners of Works for
£2,300, (fn. 81) and in 1883–4 the site was enlarged by
the acquisition of property in Rose Lane and
Ann's Place, part of which was used for further
buildings (fn. c1)(fn. 77) The school was closed in 1939 and
damaged during the war of 1939–45. The
buildings were sold in 1951 and reconstructed for
commercial use. A new school will be built in
Hampstead.

The well composed front of the building has a
wide central feature of five bays projecting slightly
from narrow wings. The ground storey is of
painted stucco and the five windows of the central
feature are recessed between wide pilasters or piers
with moulded caps carrying an unbroken entablature. The south wing has been altered, but the
north wing retains a doorway, flanked by narrow
windows. The lofty upper storey of the central
feature is of yellow brick, with five round-arched
windows having moulded archivolts and keystones
of stucco. The moulded imposts to the piers, the
long-and-short quoins defining the angles, and the
bold main cornice are also of stucco. Each wing
has two windows, the north wing alone retaining
the original treatment with a pedimented window
below one with a framing architrave. The parapet originally had balustrades centred over the
windows.

Nos. 135–153 (odd) Commercial Street

Peabody Buildings

George Peabody was born in 1795 in Massachusetts. He became a banker and merchant and
in 1837 settled in London, where he died in 1869.
Although he had enormous wealth he lived
modestly, devoting his fortune to philanthropic
ventures in the United States and England. He
is known chiefly for his creation of the Peabody
Trust in 1862, which originally consisted of a sum
of £150,000 (later considerably augmented), ’to
ameliorate the condition of the poor and needy of
this great metropolis, and to promote their comfort and happiness’. The Trustees were free to
apply the fund as they thought fit but were forbidden to allow religious or political bias to influence them. Peabody himself suggested ’the
construction of such improved dwellings for the
poor as may combine in the utmost possible degree
the essentials of healthfulness, comfort, social
enjoyment and economy’. (fn. 82)

In 1863 the Peabody Trustees purchased a site
in Commercial Street from the Commissioners of Works for £3,300, (fn. 83) and opened their first block
of family dwellings there on 29 February 1864 (fn. 84)
(Plate 77a). The architect was H. A. Darbishire, (fn. 83) who had previously designed Columbia
Square, Bethnal Green, for Miss Burdett
Coutts. (fn. 85)

The arrangement of these first Peabody Buildings is noteworthy, the planning being on similar
lines to that of Columbia Square, and setting a
pattern which was to be followed in many subsequent Peabody estates. This sombre red brick
building takes the form of two five-storeyed
ranges merging together at the acute-angled corner of Commercial Street and Folgate Street. The
longer range fronts Commercial Street and has
shops on the ground storey, each with ample
storage in the basement, and a five-room maisonette
arranged behind and above the shop. In the
original plan, four storeys of the Folgate Street
range and the third and fourth storeys of the
Commercial Street range contained flats of two
and three rooms, arranged on each side of a central corridor. The living-rooms, entered directly
from the corridor, measured on average thirteen
feet by ten feet, and the bedrooms thirteen feet by
eight feet, all the rooms having a clear height of
eight feet. The lavatories were separated from the
flats, being grouped in pairs on each side of the
staircases, the allotment of water-closets being one
for two families. The top storey was given over
to communal laundries, drying-rooms, and bathrooms.

The shops and maisonettes were let at economic
rentals to provide income offsetting the loss on the
low-rented flats. Of these there were seven with
three rooms, letting at 5s. per week; forty-one
with two rooms, letting at 4s. per week; six with
two rooms, letting at 3s. 6d. per week; and three
single rooms letting at 2s. 6d. The porter was
allotted a five-room maisonette in the middle of
the Commercial Street range, with easy control of
the two main staircases of that range. (fn. 86)

The unplastered walls of the rooms, the direct
access without lobbies from the corridors, the
absence of fireplaces in all but the living-rooms,
and the rents, were adversely criticized in The
Builder.
(fn. 87) Despite these faults, however, there is
no doubt that this first block of Peabody Buildings
was an important step towards the proper housing
of the poor of East London.

Nos. 45–55 (odd) Commercial Street

Formerly the Jewish and East London Model Lodgings

In August 1863 the Chief Rabbi opened this
block of family dwellings in Commercial Street
for the Jewish and East London Model Lodging
House Association. (fn. 88) The site had been purchased in 1862 from the Commissioners of Works
for £1,600. (fn. 89) The architect was Hyman Henry
Collins, of 61 Torrington Square, whose design
was chosen in competition by Professor Donaldson.
The contractor was R. Stap, (fn. 90) and the cost of the
building was £6,000; accommodation was provided for thirty families with six shops on the
ground floor. (fn. 88)

By 1893 the block was known as the Alexandra
Buildings. It is no longer used for residential purposes, and the centre portion has been rebuilt.

Police Station, Commercial Street

This building (Plate 49a) was erected in 1874–1875 by Messrs. Lathey Brothers to the design of
Frederick H. Caiger, Surveyor for the Metropolitan Police; it then had a three-storey frontage,
to Commercial Street only. The top storey and
Elder Street wing were added in 1906.

The site had been sold by the Commissioners of
Works in 1862, and after passing through two
intermediate ownerships had been acquired by the
Receiver for the Metropolitan Police District in
May 1874. (fn. 91)

No. 136 Commercial Street

Royal Cambridge Music Hall

Demolished

The first music hall on this site was in existence
in the autumn of 1869 when it was probably newly
built. (fn. 92) Of this building it was written in 1884,
’Many of the characteristics of the old Canterbury
are visible here. There are the pictures, copies of
gallery works of importance, and no little merit,
hanging in the noble staircase… The interior of
the hall is severely classic in form, with a remarkably broad stage… [The] edifice itself is mainly
characterized by unusual breadth.’ A bill-head of
1885 claimed that it ’is acknowledged to be the
handsomest hall in England’’. (fn. 93) The theatre was
rebuilt in 1898 by H. Percival with a pleasant
Moresque front (Plate 49b). (fn. 94) In 1930 it was
taken over by Messrs. Godfrey Phillips and de- molished in 1936 for the extension of their
tobacco factory. (fn. 95)

No. 142 Commercial Street

The Commercial Tavern

This was built by Abraham Keymer, of the
Norfolk Arms, Bethnal Green, licensed victualler.
The site was leased to him in February 1865 by
the Commissioners of Works, for eighty years
from Michaelmas 1863 at a peppercorn lease for
the first year and then at £50 per annum. (fn. 96)

Footnotes

n1. The construction of this line of street would have required the demolition of No. 56 Artillery Lane.